Censorship in cinema normally refers to one of two things: either a government-mandated restriction on the political ideas expressed within a film, or the self-regulation of the entertainment industry to “maintain the moral, social and ideological mores of their national culture” (Maltby, 1997). There have been very few occasions in mainstream Hollywood when the former has been required, so it has been primarily through self-regulation that the film industry has flourished. Such is the dominance of Hollywood in the film industry that this practice of self-regulation has dominated throughout cinema history (Maltby,1997). The most famous of these self-regulatory practices was the Hays Code, which was in place until the late 1960s and laid out a specific list of “don’t”s and “be careful”s, covering the portrayal of not only sex and relationships but also crime and morality. Films released during this period had to work carefully within these guidelines to ensure they would be able to be distributed to mainstream cinemas and consequently to their target audience (Mondello, 2008). This essay examines three films released during this period, Brief Encounter (David Lean 1945), Breakfast at Tiffany’s (Blake Edwards 1960) and Breathless (Jean-Luc Godard 1961), and reflects on how this self-regulation affected their portrayal of the attitudes of the day.

Brief Encounter, a quintessentially British film released immediately after the Second World War, is a film about the “repression of excessive romantic emotion”; however, “it uses cinematic techniques in its lighting, camerawork and lighting which can only be described as excessive” to provide the viewer with an “equivocally subjective viewpoint” (Nelmes, 2011). In this way, the film clearly builds empathy for the protagonists, who are involved in an extra-marital affair, thereby giving credit to the theory that there is a hidden underlying message in the film—homosexuality.

While extra-marital affairs were scandalous post-war, homosexuality was at the time illegal in the United Kingdom and strictly a taboo subject in society. The film’s screenwriter Noël Coward was private about his homosexuality throughout his life; David Lean, on the other hand, was more avant-garde with his relationships, having been married six times (Thomson, 2010). With this in mind, Coward could be seen to be reflecting on his sexuality and writing a parable about the difficulties facing gay couples in post-war Britain, a time when such relationships would have had devastating consequences for all concerned if made public. Brief Encounter could be a metaphor for how gay men had to live—not openly expressing their feelings, only having “close friendships”, and maybe even (although not in Coward’s case) entering into a marriage of convenience (Thomson, 2009). This use of metaphor is common in cinema. Two more recent examples are Soldier Blue (Ralph Nelson 1970) and Little Big Man (Arthur Penn 1970), which used the treatment of Native Americans as a metaphor for the Vietnam war and race relations (Doughty and Etherington-Wright, 2011).

Breakfast at Tiffany’s (Blake Edwards 1960) is based on a novella by Truman Capote which tells the story of a prostitute. While morality had evolved by 1960 for the baby boomer generation, the same could not be said for their parents. Under the Hays Code, the themes addressed by the novella could not be openly shown in the cinema. Therefore, in contrast to the source material, the film does not overtly mention that Holly is a prostitute, removes all trace of the pregnancy with Jose’s child and concludes with a romantic happy ending that brings Holly and Paul together.

On the face of it, Holly and Paul are living the American dream, with money, nice apartments in the heart of New York City and little need to work. The opening shot of the film demonstrates this by showing a taxi driving along 5^th Avenue, the immaculate Holly Golightly stepping out of it. However, Breakfast at Tiffany’s is also a film about loneliness and unfulfilled dreams, and showing Holly as a solitary figure dwarfed by the buildings of New York in this same opening helps to reinforce this impression to the audience. Holly is a complex character who fails to realise that she is the architect of all her own problems; her desire is to have a stable life, but she is fixated on the idea that this can only come through money.

There are many reasons as to how and why anaudience interacts with a movie, and a major factor is escapism (Doughty and Etherington-Wright, 2011). Therefore the self-imposed censorship of Breakfast at Tiffany’s, where vague dialogue explaining how Holly earns money (“I always get fifty dollars for the powder room”; Edwards, 1961) clearly alludes to her being a prostitute but does not mention it explicitly. The casting of Audrey Hepburn in the role of Holly also affects the way the audience views the character. An audience in 1961 would not immediately believe Hepburn to be a prostitute, as she was not perceived to be sexual or common enough; perhaps if one of her more sexual contemporaries, Kim Novak or Janet Leigh for example, had been cast, the veil over Holly’s employment status would have been thinner (Thomson, 2015).

These traits in the film allow it to maintain the escapism while permitting the darker themes of loneliness and prostitution to come through, especially when combined with the overall mise-en-scène, including costumes which were stylish and elegant; the use of lighting and colour in the cinematography depicts New York as glamorous without being over the top. Even now, over 50 years later, the film’s style remains attractive to the viewer. The self-regulation at the heart of Hollywood stopped Edwards from dealing with the underlying theme of a potentially unachievable American dream head on, which would have been more relevant to teenagers of the day but would have made the film unpalatable to the average audience.

Finally, Breathless (Jean-Luc Godard 1961) was a contemporary of Breakfast at Tiffany’s. Being made outside of the Hollywood studio system, however, the film deals with love, lust, and relationships much more directly, with an overall mise-en-scène far different to that of Brief Encounter and Breakfast at Tiffany’s. The use of handheld camera techniques and on location shooting (including the interior shots) gives the film the casual, more documentary look which made the French New Wave revolutionary (Thompson and Bordwell, 2016).

Working outside of a studio system, Godard takes the conventions of film noir and gives them a contemporary setting, creating an homage to that golden age and sowing the seed for movies where the main protagonists are outlaw lovers, such as Bonnie and Clyde (Arthur Penn 1967), Badlands (Terrence Malick 1973) and True Romance (Tony Scott 1993) (Thompson and Bordwell, 2016). The Hays code of conduct specifically identified that film makers should be careful of “excessive or lustful kissing, particularly when one character or the other is a ‘heavy’”. As Jill Nelmes suggests, Godard did not have to invite us to like his characters and thus could produce a film which provided no excuses for the protagonists’ objectionable behaviour (Nelmes, 2012). In contrast, Breakfast at Tiffany’s and Brief Encounter go out of their way to have the audience empathise with their protagonists.

Breathless shows that in the late 50’s and early 60’s, young people of the day were starting to live outside of the traditional family unit. Patricia is living an amoral lifestyle as a young American in Paris. Paul is self-centred and fixed on sexual conquest. Patricia also appears committed to the promiscuous lifestyle, even when she finds out she is pregnant. They are a particularly amoral couple, happy to live their lives as they see fit without regard for convention.

In summary, while the absence of the restrictions imposed by the Hays Code allowed Godard to produce a film with more realism than Edwards and Lean, censorship did not stop Edwards and Lean from attempting to tackle issues of the day. While they are more shrouded in metaphor and mystery, their films do allow contemporary audiences to take watch the wanted from the movie – peer behind the veil if they wanted, whereas Godard’s film can be viewed as a more accurate record of its time that Hollywood audiences of the era may have found difficult to accept.

Bibliography

Badlands. (1973). [film] Directed by T. Malick. USA: Warner Bros.

Bbfc.co.uk. (2017). British Board of Film Classification | British Board of Film Classification. [online] Available at: http://bbfc.co.uk/ [Accessed 3 May 2017].

Bonnie and Clyde. (1967). [film] Directed by A. Penn. USA: Warner Bros/Seven Arts.

Breakfast at Tiffany’s. (1961). [film] Directed by B. Edwards. USA: Paramount Pictures.

Breathless. (1960). [film] Directed by J. Goddard. France: Films Georges de Beauregard.

Brief Encounter. (1945). [film] Directed by D. Lean. England: Eagle-Lion Distributors Ltd.

Doughty, R. and Etherington-Wright, C. (2011). Understanding film theory: Theoretical and critical perspectives. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

Ebert, R. (2003). Breathless Movie Review & Film Summary (1960) | Roger Ebert. [online] Rogerebert.com. Available at: http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-breathless-1960 [Accessed 3 May 2017].

Gristwood, S. (2010). [online] Breakfast at Tiffany’s 50 years on. Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/classic-movies/8032801/Breakfast-at-Tiffanys-50-years-on.html [Accessed 1 Dec. 2016].

Hitchman, S. (2008). FRENCH NEW WAVE HISTORY. [online] Available at: http://www.newwavefilm.com/about/history-of-french-new-wave2.shtml [Accessed 15 Aug. 2016].

Krone (2014). 15 famous movies that have subtle hidden meanings. [online] Available at: http://www.tasteofcinema.com/2014/15-famous-movies-that-have-subtle-hidden-meanings/ [Accessed 20 Nov. 2016].

Lewis, J. (n.d.). Hollywood v. Hard core page 301 15. [online] New York: New York University Press. Available at: https://www.oca-student.com/sites/default/files/oca-content/key-resources/res-files/hollywood_v._hard_core_page_301-15.pdf [Accessed 10 Aug. 2016].

Little Big Man. (1970). [film] Directed by A. Penn. USA: National General Pictures.

Maltby, R. (1997) Censorship and Self-Regulation. In Nowell-Smith, G. (1997). The Oxford history of world cinema. 1st ed. New York: Oxford University Press.

Mondello, B. (2008). Remembering Hollywood’s Hays code, 40 years on. [online] Available at: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93301189 [Accessed 10 Aug. 2016].

Motion picture production code. (2016). In: Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation.

Nelmes, J. (2012). An introduction to film studies. 5th ed. Abingdon: Routledge.

Screenonline.org.uk. (2014). BFI Screenonline: The Hays Code. [online] Available at: http://www.screenonline.org.uk/film/id/592022/ [Accessed 3 May 2017].

Soldier Blue. (1970). [film] Directed by R. Nelson. USA: Embassy Pictures.

Temple, M. and Witt, M. (2008). The french cinema book. Palgrave Macmillan.

Terms, P. (2016). French new wave cinema – film techniques. [online] Available at: https://prezi.com/fouzcnvw2qqg/french-new-wave-cinema-film-techniques/ [Accessed 15 Aug. 2016].

Thompson, K. and Bordwell, P. (2016). Film art: An introduction. 1st ed. United States: McGraw Hill Higher Education.

Thomson, D. (2009). Have you seen? A personal introduction to 1,000 films including masterpieces, oddities and guilty pleasures (with just a few disasters). London: Penguin Group UK.

Thomson, D. (2010). Brief encounter: The best romantic film of all time. The Guardian. [online] Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2010/oct/16/brief-encounter-romance [Accessed 21 Sep. 2016].

Thomson, D. (2015). How to watch a movie. 1st ed. Profile Books Ltd.

True Romance. (1993). [film] Directed by T. Scott. USA: Warner Bros.

YouTube. (2012). Professor Dreyfus lecture – Breathless (À bout de souffle) Active & Passive Nihilism. [online] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=th52fhMlsDA&t=926s [Accessed 3 May 2017].

Student Number: 514508

Introduction to Film Culture: Assignment 2

Reflection on cinema has explored and expressed contemporary social and moral attitudes over the years.

The sex runs through all lives; it is fundamental to existence as species, and it underpins almost every aspect of human society. What is unique to humans is their morality and sensibilities about sex, and therefore the concept of love and lust is born.

In this essay I look to illustrate how film makers have worked with this morality in relecting the issues of the day.

Brief Encounter Dir David Lean 1945

Brief Encounter released immediately after the second world war, it is a story of the doomed love that grows between housewife Laura Jesson and Dr Alec Harvey after a chance meeting in a railway station café.

Britain of 1945 was moral on the surface were to repress desire that was still a level of “Victorian type values”, but the country had just emerged from 6 years of war and hardship. People lives had changed significantly as the war touched them, either with the sudden death of a loved one or close friend, because you thrust into new situation either as a soldier or as for woman thrown into working in factories and farms. The underlying nature of people was changing but not always on the surface.

The director David Lean and writer Noel Coward with Brief Encounter explores that morality by show a story of an unconsummated love affair conducted by too decent married people who at their heart are conflicted by their feelings. David Thompson is his 2010 Top Ten romantic film alludes that the sedateness of this movie is out of step with the films of the day which their the lust and desire; all with the Hays Code of course, but Brief Encounter is more about a dream of romance.

The screen shots illustrate that they the relationship between Laura and Alec is very much like that of a teenage school romance; dates in the pictures and the sheer pleasure in the faces that they are just in each other company. There is quietness about Noel Cowards script there is no symbolism required to get around the Hays Code; the couple never has sex. There is a more open affair happen on the fringes of the film with the flirting between that station guard and café manageress.

This could be Coward’s way of reflection on his personal life. Coward was very private about his homosexuality throughout his life, whereas in contrast the director David Lean was married many times. Could it be that Coward was writing a parable for a gay relationship in post-war Britain, not just the extramarital affair?

Although, throughout the film, it is evident the couple are disenchanted with you current relationship it does not go into the reason why. We are given a glimpse into Laura’s home life, which seems to perfectly reasonable. The film gives no reason why we should will these too to leave their respective partners which play to the morals of the days and the depiction of Laura with the eye look of an adoring teen help keep the film firmly grounded in the outward morals of the day.

Laura and Alec part at the end of the movie choosing to remain on their current paths although they have clearly fallen deeply in love with each other. The love unrequited and again morals are kept by now allowing the farewell to get too emotional, they final cup of tea is disturbed by an acquaintance and Alec departs with a tap on the shoulder and Laura returning to embrace we husband for being far away.

Breakfast at Tiffany’s Dir Blake Edwards 1960

Based on a novella by Truman Capote tells the love story of Holly and Paul, one an escort and the other the “kept man” of an older married woman.

The film in contrast to the book does not overtly mention that Holly is a prostitute and removes all trace of the pregnancy with Jose’s child and end with the Paul and Holly being together. Morality had changed by 1960 for the baby boomers, not their parents nor the Hayes Code, so these changes were necessary to deal with the mixed morality of the time.

The film employs use of symbolism in the dialogue to lead the audience on a journey to the real mean should they wish to follow it

For example:

“I always get $50 for the powder room” – Holly explains what happens on her dinner dates

“Well is she or isn’t she? Is she or isn’t she….. a phoney?” OJ Berman and Paul discussing

Moreover, below “Do you think she handsomely paid? If had her money I would be richer than she is …” Discussing the stripper breasts and how they would change here life as an escort.

Although she is clearly an escort, the film gives innocence to Holly and allow in contrast to Brief Encounter provides an insight into her background which while not normal like Laura it is not too hard and shown that she still cares for the people she has left behind in the scene below.

The film as a whole is beautiful to watch; the mise en scene is a delight to the eyes. From the opening scene of the taxi pulling up at Tiffany’s; combine with the one-sided love story from the eyes of Paul how no matter what happens he loves Holly cleverly distract the audience from the underlying story of a “golddigger.” It ends with a scene of high emotion when Paul explain to Holly that she is architect of here own troubles and she should let him into her life which brings the story back to an excellent moral conclusion

Breathless Dir Jean- Luc Goodard 1961

Also released in the early 1960’s Jean-Luc Goddard Breathless deal with love and lust much more directly. Freed from the constrains of the Hollywood system and the Hayes Code Goddard was able to produce a film that gives no excuse for its protagonist’s actions.

Michel (Jean-Paul Belmondo) is without redeeming features; he steels from his girlfriend while she is distracted; he ignores Patricia (Jean Seberg) while reading a pinup magazine, and for no reason kills a motorcycle policeman.

Patricia is also amoral she is living a bohemian lifestyle, happy to have a casual relationship with Michel and others. Goddard has not used symbolism to reflect the morality; he is showing it in a very raw way.

Using the mobile camera that was the hallmark of the new wave, the film has the fly on the wall or documentary-style look. The mise en scene and editing are much different to the previous films like the morality it shows it much rawer.

There is some symbolism; although Michel always pesters Patrica for sex, there are no overt sex scenes. The camera does cut away at an appropriate time.

Comparing Breathless and Breakfast at Tiffany’s as contemporaries, Breathless addresses the issues of the day more directly. Breakfast at Tiffanys is flawed in the fact that is disguised the issues in Hollywood wrapping i.e. the beautiful set pieces and happy ending love story.

Moreover, of the three again Breakfast at Tiffany’s is the weakest at dealing with the social issues of the day, although credit is due to bring these matters to the screen if heavily masked, while for all it repression Brief Encounter is reflecting a situation that is still as relevant today as it was them.

Bibliography

pangeaprogressredux (2012) Professor Dreyfus lecture – breathless (À bout de souffle) active & passive nihilism. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=th52fhMlsDA (Accessed: 20 September 2016).

Thomson, D. (2009) Have you seen? A personal introduction to 1, 000 films including masterpieces, oddities and guilty pleasures (with just a few disasters). London: Penguin Group UK.

Thomson, D. (2010) Brief encounter: The best romantic film of all time. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2010/oct/16/brief-encounter-romance (Accessed: 21 September 2016).